Baxter - BJ1441 B3 1673

!k<•ft· 6. ' ~·ft.S. Cafes of Vil>Qrte. Anfw. If you fpeak not of a diffolving the hood of their Relations, but withdrawing as to coha– bitation: ~ anf\~Cr, 1. lt is n_ot to be done upon paffions and ,difcontents, to feed and gratifie each ?thers VICIOU~ dillcmpeJs or Jllt~rrfi : For then both t~f Confont and flre{eparation are their fins. But 1f really fuch an uncurable unfultablenefs be berwetn them, as that their 1ives muft needs bemife– rablc by the!r co~habitation, I_know n~t but they may li~c: afunder; fo be it 1 that ( after atfether t'!leans uf,d m_vam ) they do tt .by d~~~?erate fr.ee confent. ,Bu_t if one of them fhould by craft (If crudcy_ conjlram the other to C(1n{e~lt, It IS unlawful to the con~tramrr. No~ mufi impatience· make ei– ther of them ungroundedly dcfpau of the.cure of a.ny unfuuablene(s whtch i.s, really curabk. But ~any fad mtlanct:s tmght be gtven, m whtch co-habnauon may be a confiant calami:y t~ borh and d1fiapce may be their relief, andfuttherthern both in Gods tCrvice, and in their corporal concern– ':len~s. Yt-t I fay not, that this is no fin: for their unfuitablenefs is their fin: And God Hill ob1Igeth them to lay down that tin which maketh them unfuitable; and. Jherefore doth not allow them to liv,e aCnnder , it being fiill>their duty, to live together in Love and peace ; And fa) ing they can– not, freeth them nor from the duty. But yet that moral Impotency may make fuch a (~-paraticm s afo:cfaiJ, to be a Ldfo:r fin dun their unpeaccable co-habitation. Q!cfi. 6. May ml 1he Kela1iun il ftlf be dijfolved by mulual free confenl , fo lhat thty may marry Qtberi? · . Anf.-r. As to the Rtla1io~, they will fiill .be Related as thofe that did CovrHaHt to live in conjugal foc1cty, and are fhll aUoR'!td Jt and oblzgtd to tt, tf the: Impedtments.were but rcll}oved: And it is but the rxercifc which is hmdertd. And they may not Confent to marry others; J. Becaufe the contraCt· ed Relation was for L•fe, R""· 7· •· and Gods Law accordingly obligeth them. Marriages pro ttm– por~, d1ffoluble by con{ent, are not ofGods infiitution, but contrary to it. 2· They know not but then Imped iments of co·habitation may be removed. 3• Jfhc that rnarrieth an innocent divorced woman commit adultery, by parity of reafon (with advantage) it will be fo })ere. If you fay, what if tith,·r of them cannot contain ? I anfwer, He that will not take heed before, mufi be patient af– terwards, and not make advantage of his own folly, to the fulfilling of his lulls. If he will what he ought ro do in the ufe of all mea11S, he may live chaHdy. And 4· The publick intcrefi mu(\ over– rule the private, and {hat which would be unjuft' in private refpe6ts, may for publick good become a duty: 'It ft.:tmeth unjn!l h(<'(e with us, that the idnoc.ent Countrey Chould tepa'y every ·man his mo– ney~ who between Sun and Sun is robbed on the Road : And yet becaufe it will engage the Countrey . to watchfu\n(fs, ic i's juH as for the common good : And he that confentcth t~ be a member of a Commonwealth, doth thereby confwt to fubmit his own right to the common interefL So here ; Jf all fhould have leave to marry qthcrs when they confent to 13au, it would bxing utter confufion, and it would encourag~.: wicked men, to abufc·theit Wives, till they forced them to confcnr. There– fure fome rnufi bear the trouble which their folly hath b10ught on themfelve~, rather than the common order fhould be confounded. , Q!l<fi, 7• D01!J Adul•ery dijfolvt I he bond ofMarriage, or not 1 Amefiusfoith, it d01h. AndMr.whate– ley h4ving {aid (o, afttrward rtcanttd it by the per[JY:~[wH of otbtr DiviHt.l. Anfw. The difference is only about the Name and not about the Matter it felf. The Reafon which moved Dr. Amtr is, Becaufe the injured perfon is free; therefore not bound: therefore the bond is diffolved : ThOtreafon whic;h Mr. TYhateley could not anfwcr is, Becaufe it isnot fornication, bur law~ ful, if they continue their conjugal familiarity after adultery : therefore that bond is not diiTolved. In all which it is eafie to perceive:, that one of them taketh the word Vinculum or Bond in one fcnfe, that is, C For their Covenant-obligation to continue their Relation and mutua\ duties. 1 And die other tak~th it in another fenfe, that is, [For the Relation it felf as by it they arc allowed conjugal familiarity, if the injured perfon will continue it. J The firfi Vincnlum or Bond is diffolved, the fe– cond is not. In the Matter we are agreed, that the injured man may put away an adulterous Wife ( in a regular way) if he plcafe; bur withal that he may continue the Relation if he pleafe. So that his continued ConfCnt fhatl fufficc to continue it a lawful Relation and cxercife; and his Will on the contrary fhall [uffice to diffolve the Relation, and difoblige him. (Saving the pubtick order.) Quell. g, T>ttt u n011he i,njurtd par1y a1 all obliged to [eparalt, bu1 left frte 1 An[w. Confidering the thing fimply in it fell, he is wholly free to do as he pleafe. But forall that Accidents or Circumftanccs may make it one mans duly to divorce, and an6thers duty to contmue the Relation; according as it is like to do more good or hurt. Sorrietimcs it may be a duty to expofe the fin to publick fhame, for the prevention of it in others ; and alfo to deliver ones (elf from .a. ca– lamity. Aad fometirnes there may be fo great repentance, and hope ef better effeCts by forg1vmg, that it may be a duty to forgive : And prudence mufi lay one thing with another, to difcernon which fide the duty lyeth. Q ue!\. 9· Is il only the priviledge of 1heMan, 1ba1 be may pu1 away all adulm01uWif•.l or alfo of tbt TYum:m, to depart from an adulterom Husband? 1he reafon of dJt dottbt i>f, becaufe C11rijl ment1oneth tbt mans power o,tly, Mltth. 5· & 19· ' An[w. I· The reafon why Chrifi: fpeakcth only of the mans c~fe, is, bec::aufe he wa,s occafioned on– ly to refirain the vicious.cufiome of mens caufelefs putting away their Wives; having no occafx0n .to rcfirain Wemcn from leaving their Husbands. Men having the Rule did abufe il to rhe Worocns ~~jury; which Chrifi forbiddcth~ And as it is an act of power, it conccrneth the m~n alout: : Bur ~s tt is an act ofLiberty, it feerneth to.me to be fuppofed, that the Woman hath the iame freedom : ::;ee– ing the Covenant is violated to her wrong. And the Apoftle in 1 Cor. 7· doth make the ~a~e of the Man arid of the Woman to be equal in the point of Injidrlily and dtjtrlion. I conle!s that 1t " unfafe extendlllg

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=